- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 06:16:08 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8038 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2009-10-25 06:16:08 --- EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: Making the closing tag optional would be remarkably confusing. Consider: <foo>x</foo> ...in a UA where <foo> is void and where it isn't -- what does it contain? It would also require additional hacks in the parser, to handle: <foo></foo> ...as ok but to raise errors for: </foo> <foo>x</foo> <foo<!-- --></foo> <foo><!x></foo> <foo>&</foo> ...etc. Also, in practice, the new void elements are not a problem: we haven't introduced void elements that are affected by this in a major way. <source> is only useful if <video>/<audio> work anyway, and if they don't, it doesn't matter if the <source> contains the element's contents. <command> can trivially be put inside a <div> with display:none, or at the bottom of a <menu>, or in an <li> in a <menu>, so again, it doesn't really make much difference. Thus it seems to me that overall, the language is best served by not adding this extra complexity at this time. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 25 October 2009 06:16:12 UTC